My inner Bennett Cerf

These will
keep you groaning all day.

A fellow accidentally ingested some alpha-L-glucose and discovered that he had no ill effects. Apparently he was ambidextrose.

A bloke walks into a pub, and asks for a pint of Adenosinetriphosphate. The barman says “That’ll be 80p (ATP) please!”
(note 100p = £1, and ATP is short for Adenosinetriphosphate, but you already knew that.)

Some genetic researchers were studying Acinonyx jubatus to find out why he had a high abnormal sperm count. They gave a group of these animals a histocompatibility (tissue-type) test.

“This is singular,” observed one to the other. “Every one of these cats gave the same answers.”

“Aw,” drawled the other, “they’re all a bunch of cheetahs.

Did you hear about the biologist who had twins? She baptized one and kept the other as a control.

Q: What tool is used to measure a hole in the head?

A: A Phineas gage.

Q: Why didn’t the dendrochronologist get married?

A: All he ever dated was trees!

Q: What is the only thing worse than a mecium?
A: A Paramecium

Q: What does the H. in Jesus H. Christ stand for?

A: In order of increasing groans:

1: Hallowed.

2: Harold. (As in, “Harold be thy name.)

3: Haploid. (Best of all.)

Q: As what did the antibody go to the Halloween costume party?

A: As an “immunogobulin”.

Q: What’s a biologists definition of a graph?

A: An animal with a long neck

Adenine proposing to guanine:”You know dear, mismatches are made in heaven”.

What did one thermophilic bacteriologist say online to another?

“I think you are really hot. Your PCR mine?”

There are some happy sciences, but others are not so happy. A case in point concerns embryologists who tend to be a morose and saddened group than most. No wonder. One of the first things they learn is that our lives are ova before they’ve begun.

A red blood cell walked into a busy restaurant. The hostess asked, “Would you like to sit at the bar?”

The red cell answered, “No thanks, I’ll just circulate.

How do you recognize a native American cell biologist?

He lives in ATP!

They were the first to attempt to colonize Mars. They knew it would be difficult , but they were determined to succeed.

They had landed with grass seeds to plant and embryos of horse, sheep and cattle. But the grass wouldn’t grow, and none of the calves survived. The horses and sheep were doing well, but there not enough animals to meet their needs.

So they sent a message to earth asking for more sheep and horses and a replacement for the cattle and grass. They particularly wanted an animal that could be used as meat in place of beef.

Earth radioed back asking if venison would be satisfactory and the colonists replied it was.

Finally a space shuttle arrived with the needed supplies. The bill of lading was rushed to the leader of the colony who then spoke to his consul, “we got everything we asked for,” he shouted. . . . “They sent mare zygotes and doe zygotes and little lambs and ivy.”

The problem with writing by committee

Mr Deity is wrestling with the various versions of his story. Much is explained by his choice of a script doctor.

By the way, if you’ve ever wanted to actually meet Mr Deity, you’ve got a shot: he’ll be speaking at the Atheist Alliance International 2009 Convention in LA this October. And it’s not just him, look at this phenomenal lineup of speakers.

I’m going to be in there somewhere, too — I’m a late addition. It will be a wonderful assemblage of the godless. Plus one deity.

Rehabilitating Mr. Wiggles

One nice thing about being the most evil blogger on the interwebs is that I can occasionally trick my kids into thinking I might be just a little bit cool. My son Connlann introduced me to the black humor of Mr Wiggles (my kids have inherited a weird sense of humor!), and the author, Neil Swaab, offered me a copy of his latest compilation, Rehabilitating Mr Wiggles. I mentioned that it was my boy who led me to Mr Wiggles, and so Neil generously sent me a second copy, autographed for Connlann. See the effect?

i-74effcef1fe46628b454a7254679154f-connlann_wiggles.jpeg

If you don’t know Mr Wiggles, you’re probably going to spend the next few hours browsing in appalled fascination.

A lesson in atheist philosophy

Hang on; Klinghoffer is bad, but you haven’t read the clever reasonings of Nancy Greenwood of Red Deer, Alberta yet. She doesn’t like those atheists one bit — she’s got a list of 5 horrible facts about atheists (although it could be longer, if she hadn’t kindly left off the bits about baby-eating).

Being the hot topic of the day, any discussion of atheism, should include these ‘difficult to admit’ points:

Firstly, atheists claim that they themselves are god. They claim they have superior knowledge then the rest of us by trying to say that they have better knowledge because of their own thinking. They will not acknowledge anyone else to be above them.

Personally, I only rank myself as a lesser demon.

Secondly, atheists have been hurt somewhere in their lives, can’t understand suffering, and are mad at God — so it is easier to deny there is one.

I am so confused. They’ve been hurt, so the can’t understand suffering…wouldn’t it make more sense to say they have not been hurt, so they can’t understand suffering, or they have been hurt, so they can understand suffering?

Personally, I’ve suffered the usual losses throughout my life, but haven’t been inordinately afflicted — I’ve actually been fairly fortunate. Her premise fails.

Thirdly, atheists are looking for God for the same reason a thief would be looking for a police officer. They don’t want to be accountable to a higher being because of the wrong things they do.

Wait, what wrong things do we do? Isn’t it a bit much to assume all atheists are criminals?

Strangely, note that her first three items — atheists think they are god, they are mad at god, and they’re afraid of god — all assume the existence of a god. This is the one basic idea these cranks have to get in their heads: atheists don’t believe in gods, period. Plug that in and everything she has said so far is patent foolishness.

Fourthly, atheists forget that when a person goes to a museum and admires a painting, that there was a painter/designer of that art piece. The art piece is absolute evidence of a painter and not caused by random nothingness.

All of the world, stars, animals, plants, oceans, and mountains are absolute proof of a divine intelligent being (beyond our human ability and thinking) who made these things.

Can the atheist make a tree? It is scientifically impossible for bees to fly (laws of physics) and yet they do. It is impossible for our eyes to see and yet they do. What more proof does an atheist need than their own heart pumping in their chest without them commanding their heart to pump each beat in perfect timing each and every second necessary?

Ah, good old argument from invalid analogy. I have a black cat. I have a second black cat. Therefore, all cats are black. Nancy shows me a gray cat. I could say my hypothesis is false, or I could close my eyes and say it’s actually a black cat and stick by my hypothesis. Which makes more sense?

She’s doing the same thing. Here’s a painting, it has a designer. Here’s a sculpture, it has a designer. Therefore everything is designed. I show her a blade of grass…it evolved, and the individual blade grew from a seed, and no designer acted. But Nancy will simply close her eyes and declare that it was designed, anyway. Why is grass designed? Because paintings are!

And, uh, Nancy? Bees don’t fly by miracle. They obey the laws of physics, none are violated. Same for vision: we know quite a bit about the physics and chemistry and biology of eyes, and there’s no step where you can it’s physically impossible.

Fifthly, denial is a strong coping mechanism in crisis, but does not serve anyone in the long run. Like an ostrich with its head in the sand, an atheist denies God not because God does not exist–but because the atheist doesn’t want God to exist and does not want to see the truth and evidence in front of their eyes.

I would rather believe in God and make sure my life is doing what is acceptable to this Superior Being than to not believe in God and find out I will be accountable to this God for everything I’ve done after I die. With 84% of the world’s population believing in the existence of God, I think the majority rules in this case.

A little Pascal’s wager to round out the list, followed by an argument from popularity. She’s one big fallacy!

Some cheerful atheist in Alberta has got to introduce themselves to Nancy, because clearly she’s never met one before. You might give her a primer in logic, too, because she hasn’t met that before, either.